Which Linux distro do you use?

[Vidar]

Arch Linux mustard race reporting!

I've tried a bunch...Ubuntu, Mint, Debian, Linux Mint Debian, Minty fresh Linux Debian (joking), Aptosid, and a couple others. Couldn't even get Gentoo or Arch to install...ever.

In the end I settle for Mint, based on Ubuntu. Gives me everything I need out of the box with no hassle.

If you want to use Arch just install Antergos. It's a configured Arch linux with a GUI installer. You can choose what DE/WM to install and it comes with yaourt installed by default so you can compile and install stuff from AUR as if they were normal packages - though any Arch user would advise you to compile by hand and not use a helper

Best of all is that it's vanilla Arch unlike Manjaro and Chakra - these are arch forks.

[Butz_san]

DEBIAN JESSIE

[Nezarn]

Lubuntu

[nosisab Ken Keleh]

When Ubuntu was born I thought it would not go long for being a hybrid of Debian using the Fedora's Anaconda (that's because Debian demanded high computer and Linux knowledge just to install).

Slackware got a hardcore fan base based on it's stability, mainly because its philosophy is lent toward server stability and doen't incentive the bleeding edge novelties, beside it's somewhat a hybrid between Linux and BSD. Slackware itself being a parting from the Caldera which went to become the polemic SCO.

Red Hat went commercial but kept kind a free subdivision called Fedora. It was one the first to have a userfriendly package system (hence the choice of Fedora's Anaconda installer to be at Ubuntu's base while keeping the Debian structure).

SUSE too went commercial and became target of MS itself.

Then came the phase of Live Linux with Knopix as the major expression. Knopix achieved the fantastic feat of achieving near perfect hardware recognition and painless deployment. For a time Klaus Knopper himself worked with Debian team to better Debian's installation.

In the end, almost every Linux is equal with exceptions, the two big ones being the Init process (Slackware) and Directory structure (which Debian has been fighting hard to try and unify).

Is my opinion that if Linux is to someday lose the free software/open source status, Debian will be among the last to fall. Besides, due to in fact existing only three real different Linux: Debian, Slackware and Fedora (originally Red Hat), everything else just contributed to harm Linux homogeneity.

I used almost every Linux distro ever released but Debian has been the main one since forever.

Edit: I'm old enough to have seen the Linux birth and lucky enough to have Internet Access before it being ever implanted in my country (due to working in a gov data center). So I'm from that time where even to get my ABNT2 keyboard to work meant to remap the keys "by hand", suffered enough with WinModems and drivers. Saw the kernel going from version 1.x to today.

Ah yes, and pained the lack of graphical facilities and fought Xserver original oddities, hand made IRQ setups and some other ugly animals... but different of many Linux hard core users I bless the graphical facilities, maybe because knew the time before it.

Well, I'm from the time before Windows also, so...

[DaTankAC]

If multiarch is better on Debian than Ubuntu, I will go back to trying out Debian 64bit, preferably Testing. Currently I use 32bit with PAE (instead of 64bit) Ubuntu because of difficulty compiling code, such as PCSX2, because multiarch on Ubuntu will not cooperate. It will want to remove half your 64bit libs to install one 32 bit lib. It's very weird.

I also like with Testing it's continuously rolling. I can't stand the Ubuntu update cycle. By the time I get Ubuntu's so called latest version, their packages in the repos are still quite out of date, such as the FGLRX driver. Using your own driver (such as testing 13.11 vs Mesa performance) instead of one in the repos has destroyed my X a few times, causing me to reinstall out of frustration (praise be to Dropbox for making it less painful).

---

To add, I am curious also about trying out this Antergos distro (based on Arch), and leaving the APT system for the dark side.

My complaint with Arch is installing is a nightmare, and even with all the tedious steps completed, I still couldn't get the stupid thing to boot up.

[Butz_san]

My complaint with Arch is installing is a nightmare, and even with all the tedious steps completed, I still couldn't get the stupid thing to boot up.

Same here xDDDD, I just wanted to test Arch linux a few months ago but I couldn't make it boot xDD, anyways, Debian is always a better choice, nowdays it's easy to install and configurate . I compile pcsx2 with a virtual machine and debian x86 ;D

[Code Phox]

I use Crunch Bang and BackTrack5.
If you know your way around a Linux OS you should really give CrunchBang a try.

[MintyM]

Manjaro.

Just find it easy to use, and I like the rolling release structure. Switched over from Ubuntu to Linux Mint after the whole Unity thing. Then wanted to try something new, so here I am.

[DaTankAC]

I tried to installed Antergos but it wouldn't work!

Switched to latest version of Debian Testing and I'm loving it!

[DaTankAC]

Well, I finally got Antergos to work. Other than not yet figuring out how to install fglrx their proper way, I'd say it's quite great! Better multiarch and pre-configured emulators too.